“… The accused returned to his house between 7.30 to
8.00 pm. The accused asked the victim from whom she
had conceived. The accused took the victim along with
him to my field. He returned at about 9.30 pm. He was
in inebriated condition. The accused then told me that the
victim had defamed him therefore he would kill her and
himself. Therefore I had a phone call to PS. Kharangana
but the call could not be connected therefore I telephoned
the control room at Kharangana. After some time the
police came to our village. There were some lady police
officer also. Then we went to my field. We saw that the
victim was sleeping alone. As it was dark the torch light
was turned on. The lady police officers took the custody of
the victim. The victim was taken to the police station
Kharangana where she disclosed that when she was in 8th
standard the accused committed forceful intercourse with
her and thereafter he use to commit such regularly.”

“228. From the aforesaid authorities, it is quite clear
that DNA report deserves to be accepted unless it is
absolutely dented and for non-acceptance of the same, it is
to be established that there had been no quality control or
quality assurance. If the sampling is proper and if there is
no evidence as to tampering of samples, the DNA test
report is to be accepted.”

Hon’ble Smt. Justice R. Banumathi, J., who wrote the

concurring judgment, has held in para 461 as under :

::: Uploaded on – 22/09/2017 23/09/2017 02:17:17 ::: 15

apeal129.16.odt

“461. As discussed earlier, identification by DNA genetic
fingerprint is almost hundred per cent precise and
accurate. The DNA profile generated from the
bloodstained clothes of the accused and other articles are
found consistent with the DNA profile of the victim and
DNA profile of PW 1; this is a strong piece of evidence
against the accused. In his evidence, PW 45 Dr. B.K.
Mohapatra has stated that once DNA profile is generated
and found consistent with another DNA profile, the
accuracy is hundred per cent and we find no reason to
doubt his evidence. As pointed out by the courts below,
the counsel for the defence did not raise any substantive
ground to rebut the findings of DNA analysis and the
findings through the examination of PW 45. The DNA
report and the findings thereon, being scientifically
accurate clearly establish the link involving the accused
persons in the incident.”